Monsanto's bioengineered seeds are designed to require more of the
company's herbicide.

Mother Jones, Jan-Feb 1997

No Way Around Roundup

Monsanto's bioengineered seeds are designed
to require more of the company's herbicide.

By Mark Arax and Jeanne Brokaw

Monsanto's efforts in plant biotech are aimed not only at boosting
crop yields but at helping the company retain a market for its cash
cow, the herbicide Roundup. As the biggest-selling weed killer in
the world, Roundup accounts for 17 percent of Monsanto's total
annual sales of $9 billion. Roundup is what's known as a
broad-spectrum herbicide, because it kills nearly anything green. But
its main ingredient, glyphosate, breaks down quickly in soil, so that
little or no toxic byproduct accumulates in plant or animal tissue -- a
detail that Monsanto highlights when describing itself as an
environmentally friendly company.

Monsanto's U.S. patent on Roundup runs out in three years, and if
the company is to keep its dominant market position beyond the year
2000, it needs a new spin. Enter Roundup Ready soybeans and
Roundup Ready cotton, seeds genetically manipulated so that they
can survive direct applications of Roundup. Farmers who once
confined their use of the weed killer to the borders of their planting
area can now douse entire fields with Roundup instead of using an
expensive array of sprays that each target just one or two weeds. "It
expands the Roundup market," says Gary Barton, a Monsanto
spokesman.

The only catch: Farmers using Roundup Ready seeds can only use
Roundup, because any other broad-spectrum herbicide will kill their
crops. So, with every Roundup Ready seed sale, Monsanto sells a
season's worth of its weed killer as well. The company also keeps
close tabs on the crops' progress: Farmers must sign a contract
promising not to sell or give away any seeds or save them for next
year's planting, and the company inspects its customers' farms for
violations.

Monsanto says that the new technology will benefit the
environment, arguing that the more farmers rely on Roundup, the
less they will need harsher herbicides.

But studies show glyphosate, which has been described by the
Environmental Defense Fund and by Vice President Al Gore as safer
than other herbicides, is not as benign as it is billed. Glyphosate is
less toxic than many other herbicides, but it's still the third most
commonly reported cause of illness among agricultural workers in
California. For landscape maintenance workers, it ranks highest.
And, according to the Journal of Pesticide Reform, the herbicide
also damages the ability of bacteria to transform nitrogen into a
usable form for plants, and it harms fungi that help plants absorb
water and nutrients. Residues of the herbicide have been found in
lettuce, carrots, and barley that were planted a year after the soil was
sprayed.

Critics also contend that as farmers plant more Roundup Ready
seeds and spray their fields with increased doses of Roundup,
herbicide "drift" may increase significantly. If this happens,
neighboring farms may be forced to switch to the Monsanto seeds in
order to keep their crops from being destroyed by the airborne
herbicide.

Monsanto needs a big win with Roundup Ready seeds because the
company has invested so heavily in biotech. James Wilbur, an
analyst with Smith Barney, told the Wall Street Journal that "if
genetic technology doesn't work on a product like this, it calls into
question the whole long-term strategy of the company." But it may
be human nature rather than Mother Nature that puts a dent in
Monsanto's marketing plans for biotech products. The United States
sells about 40 percent of its soybeans to Europe, where consumers
and environmentalists are in an uproar about Roundup Ready
soybeans. Even though these soybeans have been approved by the
European Union, many consumers aren't convinced they are safe. In
fact, surveys show up to 85 percent of Europeans would shun
genetically altered food if given the choice. EuroCommerce, a trade
group representing one-third of European wholesalers and retailers,
has demanded that gene-altered soybean products at least be labeled
-- a task that U.S. companies and officials say is impossible under
current distribution methods, since soybeans from different sources
are mixed together for shipment.

Furthermore, the German subsidiaries of packaged food companies
Unilever and Nestle said last year they will not buy Roundup Ready
soybeans, and canceled their U.S. soybean orders -- an amount that
equaled 7 percent of total U.S. soybean exports to Europe in 1995.

The threat of a European boycott of genetically altered food
products is significant, says Tim Galvin of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture. "Labeling is a hot topic, and far from played out." But
the USDA opposes labeling, claiming that gene-altered foods are no
different from other foods. And Galvin thinks the issue will blow
over.

But will it? "Companies like Monsanto were caught off guard," says
Ron Barnett, president of Genetic ID, a small Iowa company that
produces a test capable of detecting genetic alterations in crops.
Barnett said the test has generated considerable demand from
overseas importers who want to avoid buying altered crops.

So far, American consumers have been mostly silent. But the
Washington, D.C.-based Pure Food Campaign, which was founded
to combat bovine growth hormone, is organizing a telephone
campaign aimed at getting companies such as Coca-Cola and
McDonald's to shun genetically altered soy and corn. Greenpeace
ran a full-page ad in USA Today on Halloween, accusing Monsanto
of playing "tricks" with children's chocolate bars. And Central Soya,
one of the nation's biggest soybean processors, has barred Roundup
Ready soybeans from one of its grain elevators so that the different
beans can be compared.

U.S. officials say that consumers here and abroad are being
irrational. Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman, speaking on
behalf of the United States at the World Food Summit in Rome last
year, said, "Biotechnology can give us a quantum leap forward in
food security by improving disease and pest resistance, increasing
tolerance to environmental stress, raising crop yields, and preserving
plant and animal diversity."

"As world leaders, we shouldn't fight sound science," Glickman
argued. "Countries that choose to turn away from biotechnology
should recognize the consequences of their actions to the world."

But critics insist the government and companies like Monsanto are
missing the point. "I'm not scientifically qualified to say whether the
crops are safe or not," says Dan McGuire, former executive director
of the recently disbanded Interstate Grain Commission, which
arranged grain sales between the United States and Europe. "But
how can you be market-oriented if you don't give the market what it
wants?"